Welcome to MSDN Blogs
Sign in
|
Join
|
Help
Search
A View from Elsewhere
John Montgomery's Weblog
RSS 2.0
Atom 1.0
Home
Email
Tags
Amusement
art
Construction
Cooking
development process
Express
First Use Development
Observations
Pigs on Parade
Popfly
Tuscany
News
Archives
July 2008 (11)
June 2008 (4)
May 2008 (2)
April 2008 (4)
March 2008 (3)
February 2008 (3)
January 2008 (12)
December 2007 (2)
October 2007 (11)
July 2007 (11)
June 2007 (7)
May 2007 (10)
April 2007 (2)
March 2007 (10)
February 2007 (4)
December 2006 (12)
November 2006 (3)
October 2006 (1)
September 2006 (4)
August 2006 (10)
June 2006 (9)
May 2006 (28)
April 2006 (48)
March 2006 (12)
February 2006 (4)
January 2006 (6)
December 2005 (1)
November 2005 (3)
October 2005 (40)
September 2005 (3)
August 2005 (2)
July 2005 (10)
June 2005 (4)
May 2005 (1)
April 2005 (12)
March 2005 (2)
February 2005 (7)
January 2005 (6)
December 2004 (10)
November 2004 (10)
October 2004 (10)
September 2004 (17)
August 2004 (4)
July 2004 (11)
June 2004 (1)
May 2004 (7)
April 2004 (9)
January 2004 (11)
Popular
Maytag Neptune Class Action Suit
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 10:01 AM by
johnmont
TryRuby for BASIC: I Want One
Have you seen
Try Ruby
? I want one for BASIC. And maybe for JScript. Except I want the interpreter to be in the browser, not on a server.
Filed under:
First Use Development
Comments
#
re: TryRuby for BASIC: I Want One
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:10 PM by
Max Battcher
JScript is easy: some Browsers have a "JScript Console". You can emulate one with a simple HTML document with a TextBox that eval()s the textbox and clears it on submit/enter/whatever.
BASIC is a bit tougher. You probably want to build a JScript-based interpreter. (Unless you plan on IE-only and then you can get away with eval()ing VBScript.)
#
re: TryRuby for BASIC: I Want One
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:54 PM by
johnmont
JScript should be easy, but it's the learning content that's the experience I want. BASIC would require someone to write a BASIC interpreter in JScript. All "should be easy," but the devil would be in the details.
#
Educational content +1, But Who Cares Where The Interpreter Is?
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 8:04 PM by
Larry O'Brien
If what you're saying by "in the browser" is that you want the presentation benefits and educational potential of hypertext and the deployment ease of a URI, +1.
But why do you care what CPU executes the interpreter? With a locked-down security context, hard-wiring "using" references, and perhaps some judicious GAC manipulation, you should be able to create a void InterpretBasic(string functionBody) that is safe. Of course, you'd have to interpret the function inside a controlled context (e.g., no more than 1 second of execution time allowed).
#
re: TryRuby for BASIC: I Want One
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 8:08 PM by
johnmont
The main reason I want it executed on the client is so the server doesn't get overloaded. The main reason of "in the browser" is to eliminate the need to have any bits persisted onto the client.
New Comments to this post are disabled